View Single Post
Old 05-25-2011, 01:45 AM   #43 (permalink)
Frank Lee
(:
 
Frank Lee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: up north
Posts: 12,762

Blue - '93 Ford Tempo
Last 3: 27.29 mpg (US)

F150 - '94 Ford F150 XLT 4x4
90 day: 18.5 mpg (US)

Sport Coupe - '92 Ford Tempo GL
Last 3: 69.62 mpg (US)

ShWing! - '82 honda gold wing Interstate
90 day: 33.65 mpg (US)

Moon Unit - '98 Mercury Sable LX Wagon
90 day: 21.24 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1,585
Thanked 3,555 Times in 2,218 Posts
I apologize if that seemed too harsh, but come on. I'm insulting blind faith in nonsense.

In how many decades? of screwing around with it, NOBODY has made a successful HHO system, success being defined as an actual fuel efficiency increase. Nobody.

It's like throwing a cup of red dye in the ocean and expecting it all to turn red... it's like shovelling your driveway with a teaspoon; you'll see some result, but not one that's any good or can be called a success.

There is a reason why GM, Ford, MIT, Argonne Natl Labs, GE, U of Washington, the U.S. military, EPA, and whoever else has not developed and claimed success with HHO. I'll give you a hint and say it isn't because they never heard of it.

I challenge you or anyone to provide evidence of a successful HHO system. Testimonials and anecdotes and prayers and wishful thinking are not admissable. Beyond that I'm not wasting any more time on it; search HHO here, or find out what the U.S. Govt. has to say about it (it is online), or find the Popular Mechanics tests of economy devices (online as well).
__________________


  Reply With Quote